Fare Play: Transit Rights Are Civil Rights for L.A.’s Bus Riders

Eric Mann is a co-founder
of the Bus Riders Union. Views and opinions expressed are those of the author.

In big, sprawling cities like Los Angeles, transportation is
key. Without it, you can’t get to work, to the grocery store, or anywhere else
you might need to go. For the middle class and the wealthy, the answer is the
car. For everyone else, especially poor people of color, the answer has always
been the bus.

And yet, the city of Los Angeles seems intent on dismantling
its bus system. The Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) has cut more than 1
million hours of bus service, using the money to fund its ambitious new system
of rails. Rail funding already receives the lion’s share of the MTA's $4
billion yearly budget, but the agency also uses bus money to pay for cost
overruns on their rail projects.

That’s not just playing favorites—it’s a civil rights
violation. According to an on-board survey of bus riders conducted by the MTA
in 2002, 90 percent of L.A.’s 500,000 bus riders are African-American,
Latino, or Asian/Pacific Islanders. Bus riders are also 60 percent female
and have an average family income of only $14,000. While the majority of train
riders are also people of color, train ridership tends to be more white and
affluent. Furthermore, people of color who ride the train usually depend on the
bus to get to the station, and their commutes often involve several bus routes.

So when the city takes money away from the buses, it’s
mostly poor people of color who get hurt. That's why we at the Bus Riders Union (BRU), a transit advocacy group
with 3,000 dues-paying members and 50,000 supporters, believe it is a violation of Title VI of the
1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits government agencies that receive federal
funds from using them in a racially discriminatory manner.

We have made that case in
court before, and won. Now we’re calling on the president to order the MTA to
restore 1 million hours of bus service or risk the loss of federal funds.

Reaching Out to Obama

The Obama administration has done little to advance civil rights
enforcement. So why are we asking him to stand up for civil rights now?

First off, he’s one of the few people truly able to help.
For the past year, we have been working with Peter Rogoff, the chief of the
Federal Transit Administration, to make the case that MTA is again violating
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Mr. Rogoff investigated the MTA and found it guilty of many procedural civil rights infractions. At the last minute,
however, he stopped short of ordering the agency to restore the 1 million
hours of bus service the MTA had cut.

The Bus Riders Union (BRU) has framed this as a battle for
the soul of L.A., but the same fight is going on in cities around the country.

That is where President Obama can intervene. He can simply
call the Federal Transit Administration, indicate that his staff has
investigated the situation, and ask them to order the MTA to restore the bus
service.

We’re asking him to do that in a new campaign called
“President Obama: Enforce, Restore, and Expand Our Civil Rights.” We kicked it
off with a rally on July 25, in which more than 500 people demonstrated on the
steps of City Hall in Los Angeles. The group was young and mostly black and
Latino, with Korean drummers and white supporters.

Demonstrators called on the president to restore the cut bus service. They also called on Mayor Antonio
Villaraigosa—who serves as chair of the MTA board and who voted for many of the
cuts—to urge the president to get those hours back. Villaraigosa is in the
perfect position to do that because he will chair the Democratic National
Convention in Charlotte, N.C., in September.

The Bus Riders Union (BRU) has framed this as a battle for
the soul of L.A., but the same fight is going on in cities around the country.
On one side is a bus-centered, sustainable urban plan that offers green jobs
and draws support from working people of color. On the other is a rail-centered,
gentrifying plan supported by real-estate developers, chambers of commerce, and
the owners of local hotels and restaurants. The bus-centered plan will create a
more sustainable city in which poor people of color can remain in the
neighborhoods they’ve built and lived in for decades. The rail-centered plan
will leave the city a hollow shell as rails languish in construction, working
people are displaced, and cars dominate the roads.

Buses and trains aren’t inherently opposed. We could imagine
a system in which the two worked together, as they do in cities like New York
and Chicago. However, in Los Angeles, the MTA has initiated a war against the
bus system in its efforts to fund rail construction.

Bus Riders Fight the
Law, and Win

The situation wasn’t always so dire. As late as 1984, after then-mayor Tom
Bradley made significant investments to the city’s bus system in preparation
for the Olympics, L.A. had a pretty good bus system. Ridership skyrocketed in
response to reduced fares. And yet, by 1992, when the Bus Riders Union was
founded, the MTA had turned to building expensive rail projects that depleted
bus funding.

In 1994, the MTA board voted to raise the price of a one-way
bus ticket from $1.10 to $1.35 and to eliminate the monthly bus pass
altogether. That move more than doubled the monthly cost of transportation for
low-income bus riders, raising it from $42 to more than $100. Luckily, the Bus
Riders Union had spent a year on the buses of L.A. building a grassroots base.
Together with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, we took the MTA to
court and charged the agency with establishing a separate and unequal transit
system and therefore violating Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Buses and trains aren’t inherently opposed. We could imagine
a system in which the two worked together, as they do in cities like New York
and Chicago.

The federal courts agreed. They ordered the MTA to reverse
the fare increases and reinstate the monthly bus pass. That led to a negotiated
Consent Decree, a written agreement between the Bus Riders Union and the MTA
with specific provisions to dramatically improve the bus system. Throughout ten
years of negotiations, the BRU was able to win 2,500 new Compressed Natural Gas
clean-fuel buses, an affordable bus pass, and 1 million additional hours of
service. Altogether, it amounted to $2.7 billion in improvements to the bus
system.

The changes in working people’s lives were palpable. Over
ten years, the number of people standing on the average bus in L.A. decreased
from about 35 to about 12. Brand-new buses with wheelchair access took the
place of twenty-year-old diesel buses that often broke down on the streets. Bus
riders still had their gripes about the system, but they were appreciative and,
for the first time in years, even happy.

Is It Really Just “the Market”?

Some people look at recent changes in Los Angeles and say
that gentrification is about providing what “the market” wants. But the story
of the MTA’s approach to transit funding shows how deeply city policy shapes
that market.

The good times lasted only as long as the federal government was watching. As
soon as oversight was lifted in 2006, the MTA again began to attack the bus
system. Over the next four years, the agency raised the price of the monthly
pass from $52 to $75 and cut 1 million hours of bus service, all while
expanding rail construction.

Low-income bus riders were again late to school and work,
and spent long hours waiting for the bus. The old crowding came back. For many
people, hour-long commutes doubled in length. Hopes of finding new jobs in in
other parts of town were extinguished for those without the money to own a car.

Meanwhile, new rail hubs, such as the one at Hollywood and
Vine, created economic booms for high-priced condos and upscale restaurants.
The government was subsidizing the wealth of these neighborhoods, and it didn’t
come cheap. In L.A., it cost $500 million to build one mile of subway. For the
same money, they could buy one thousand buses, increasing the size of the fleet
from 2,500 to 3,500.

Some people look at recent changes in Los Angeles and say
that gentrification is about providing what “the market” wants. But the story
of the MTA’s approach to transit funding shows how deeply city policy shapes
that market. A reliable bus-centered system serves all neighborhoods, helps
working people keep their jobs, and provides a market for affordable food,
housing, and services. The rail-centered system that the MTA has been pushing leaves
entire parts of the city only accessible by bus. It pushes working people out
of the city and creates an artificial market for luxury condos, pricey
restaurants, and big hotels.

And Then There’s the Issue of Climate ...

The BRU’s parent organization, the Labor Community Strategy Center,
has been among those who insist that global warming requires dramatic and
immediate reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. At the 1992 World Summit on
Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa, we heard representatives
from the Association of Small Island States speak about the dangers they faced
from raging, heated waters.

Deeply influenced, we went back to L.A. and initiated a
climate justice campaign called Clean
Air, Clean Lungs, Clean Buses. We laid out plans for auto-free zones,
auto-free days, bus-only lanes, an additional 2,500 buses, and a moratorium on
new rail construction. Together, these reforms would dramatically reduce auto
emissions.

We went to work to realize these plans and, working together
with the MTA and L.A. City Council, we won agreement on the city’s first
bus-only lane, planned for Wilshire Boulevard, the busiest surface street in
the country. We hope to see it open in 2015.

So far, however, that is the exception that proves the rule.
The MTA has refused to consider building a network of bus-only lanes throughout
the city, a plan that could be completed in three years. Instead, it is moving
full-speed ahead on its rail projects, which it admits won’t be completed for
twenty years.

So here you have a county of 10 million people, who drive
7.5 million cars. That’s more cars in one county than you’d find in 45
entire states. In order to do our part for the climate, we must radically
reduce auto use in Los Angeles and other sprawling cities. The bus system
represents our best chance to do that because it is affordable, adaptable, and it’s
ready now.

What’s more, new developments in technology are making buses
faster and more reliable around the world. Simple improvements include signal
synchronization, or traffic lights timed for rapid movement; freeway buses that
run on protected rapid lanes; systems of bus-only lanes, and 24/7 service. More
cutting-edge is Bus Rapid Transit, a
unified system that involves physically separated bus lanes, pre-boarding fare
payments, and a control center that manages the system. It’s working great in
Curitiba, Brazil, and
Bogotá,
Colombia. This is our vision for the future of transportation in Los Angeles.

How Cities Can Get Drivers BikingHow can planners attract the 60 percent of Americans who say they would
bike more if they felt more secure? The answer could be cheap and
simple.

Will President Obama
Stand Up for Civil Rights?

President Obama has repeatedly expressed his gratitude to the civil rights movement for making his election thinkable and possible. Now he should support
today’s civil rights movement, which, in the tradition of Dr. King, is focused
on the needs of the poor and oppressed.

Los Angeles is a test case for continuing progress in civil
rights and environmental justice. It is also a crucial source of fundraising
dollars for Mr. Obama. We are requesting that donors to the Democratic Party
ask the president to intervene on behalf of Los Angeles bus riders.

The Dream Act students and the LGBTQ movement have shown
that this president will adopt progressive policies in response to effective,
constructive organizing. And that’s something that the members of the Bus
Riders Union have going for them. I have never seen them so energized. They
stood on the steps of City Hall, empowered by the knowledge that they are part
of a growing movement that has working people at its center.

Interested?

India’s development was supposed to be an economic success story. What we can learn from what actually happened.

The technology to achieve carbon neutrality exists, or could in the near
future. What has to happen to put those capabilities in play?

Richard Conlin: Green urban travel shouldn’t be about guilt trips or prohibition, but about making the good choices easy.

Producing in-depth, thoughtful journalism for a better world is expensive – but supporting us isn’t. If you value ad-free independent journalism,
consider subscribing to YES! today.

Email address

Eric Mann wrote this article for YES! Magazine a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. Eric is the
director of the Labor/Community Strategy Center in Los Angeles. He was the
co-chair of the Consent Decree’s Joint Working Group for the full 10 years of its existence. He is the author of Playbook
for Progressives: 16 Qualities of the Successful Organizer.